structural geology, propagation mechanics and - Stanford School of ...
structural geology, propagation mechanics and - Stanford School of ...
structural geology, propagation mechanics and - Stanford School of ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
interpenetration occur, rather the boundary demarcating volume loss migrates outward<br />
<strong>and</strong> into the surrounding material.<br />
Central to the anticrack-inclusion concept, <strong>and</strong> the mechanical analyses to follow, is<br />
the prescription <strong>of</strong> the model CB as an isolated feature <strong>of</strong> nonlinear inelastic strain that<br />
evolves quasi-statically in an infinite, homogeneous, isotropic, linear elastic continuum<br />
subject to uniform remote loading. All aspects <strong>of</strong> this model prescription warrant<br />
comment. Firstly, given the regional tectonic nature <strong>of</strong> the compression <strong>and</strong> a study area<br />
situated in the midst <strong>of</strong> a 1,400-m-thick s<strong>and</strong>stone deposit, the approximation <strong>of</strong> uniform<br />
remote stresses applied to an infinite material is reasonable. Given a ratio <strong>of</strong> trace length<br />
to spacing generally less than 0.1, it would be difficult to argue that any CB in the Aztec<br />
s<strong>and</strong>stone is truly isolated in a mechanical sense. Nonetheless, the specific field data on<br />
which the conceptual model is based comes from planar b<strong>and</strong>s that betray little reaction<br />
to their nearest neighbors.<br />
As with any granular material, the applicability <strong>of</strong> homogeneous continuity is scale<br />
dependent. In the Aztec s<strong>and</strong>stone, with an average grain diameter <strong>of</strong> 0.25 mm, this<br />
becomes reasonable at the cm-scale (Amadei <strong>and</strong> Stephansson, 1997), which represents a<br />
lower limit <strong>of</strong> resolution for interpreting the mechanical modeling results. To focus on<br />
grain-scale processes inside <strong>and</strong> immediately outside a CB, the distinct element method<br />
approach would be appropriate (Antonellini <strong>and</strong> Pollard, 1995; Morgan, 1999; Morgan<br />
<strong>and</strong> Boettcher, 1999). Also problematic at a larger scale is the application <strong>of</strong><br />
homogeneous isotropy to the complex æolian sedimentary architecture <strong>of</strong> the Aztec.<br />
Major dune boundaries influence CBs, so this conceptual model is based on data from an<br />
outcrop <strong>of</strong> b<strong>and</strong>s located within a single dune package. Given that CBs commonly cut<br />
across depositional bedding without apparent effect, we interpret the mechanical<br />
influence <strong>of</strong> such layering as negligible. Finally, the assumption <strong>of</strong> quasi-static CB<br />
<strong>propagation</strong> is based on the coherent nature <strong>of</strong> plastic quartz grain deformation within the<br />
b<strong>and</strong>s, which suggests stable <strong>propagation</strong> accommodated by slow, visco-elastic relaxation<br />
(Chester et al., 2004; Karner et al., 2003). By the same token, the paucity <strong>of</strong> plastic<br />
deformation outside the b<strong>and</strong>s suggests predominantly elastic behavior through time.<br />
59